Consultation on possible changes to bus services in Orpington (Routes R1, R2, R3, R7 and R11)

Consultation Report August 2016

Consultation on possible changes to bus services in Orpington (Routes R1, R2, R3, R7 and R11)

Consultation Report

Contents

1 Introduction ...... 2

2 The consultation ...... 3

3 Responses from members of the public ...... 5

4 Responses from statutory bodies and other stakeholders ...... 34

Appendices

Appendix A – Consultation materials ...... 40

Appendix B – Leaflet distribution area ...... 55

Appendix C – List of stakeholders consulted ...... 58

Appendix D – Questionnaire ...... 63

Appendix E – Petition ...... 67

Appendix F – All public comments about the scheme ...... 69

1

1 Introduction

We consulted stakeholders and the public about proposed changes to bus services in the Orpington area. The consultation was open between 1 February to 13 March 2016, it was extended by a week and closed on 20 March 2016.

A full review of all bus services in Orpington was carried out. The review considered reliability, usage and connectivity of bus routes in and around Orpington.

In summary the changes proposed were:

• Route R1 (Green Street Green – Grovelands) would continue to run between Green Street Green and Grovelands. We proposed a minor re-route from Repton Road to run via Tower Road, Station Road, Station approach and Orpington Station in both directions. Monday to Saturday daytime frequencies would be reduced to every 20 minutes.

• Route R2 (Biggin Hill Valley – Petts Wood Station) would run between Biggin Hill Valley and Orpington Town Centre. It would no longer run between Orpington and Petts Wood.

• Route R3 (Locksbottom – Chelsfield Village) would be re-routed from Orpington Station to Orpington Hospital via Tower Road. It would no longer run between Orpington and Chelsfield Village. Also it would run via Amherst Drive instead of Poverest Road. Monday to Saturday daytime frequencies would be increased to every 20 minutes. Evening and Sunday frequencies would be increased to every 30 minutes.

• Route R7 (Orpington – Bickley) would be extended from Bickley to Chislehurst War Memorial and extended from Orpington to Chelsfield Village. Monday to Saturday daytime frequencies would be increased to every 30 minutes. We would introduce an hourly Sunday service.

• Route R11 (Sidcup, Queen Marys Hospital – Green Street Green) would continue to run between Queen Mary’s Hospital and Green Street Green. It would no longer serve Edgington Way, Sidcup Tesco and Orpington Hospital. Monday to Saturday daytime frequencies would be increased to every 12 minutes. Evening and Sunday frequencies would be increased to every 20 minutes.

This report explains the background to the scheme and consultation and summarises the responses from the general public and stakeholders.

The results of this consultation will form part of the decision making process as to whether the scheme is implemented, modified or does not go ahead.

A separate report contains our responses to the main issues raised during the consultation period.

2

2 The consultation

The consultation was designed to enable us to understand the views of local residents, stakeholders, and businesses on the proposed structural and timetable changes.

The potential outcomes of the consultation are: • We decide the consultation raises no issues that should prevent us from proceeding with the scheme as originally planned • We modify the scheme in response to issues raised in consultation • We abandon the scheme as a result of issues raised in the consultation

2.1 Consultation objectives The objectives of the consultation were: • To give stakeholders and the public easily-understandable information about the proposals and allow them to respond • To understand the level of support or opposition for the change • To understand any issues that might affect the proposal of which we were not previously aware • To understand concerns and objections • To allow respondents to make suggestions

2.2 Who we consulted The public consultation intended to seek the views of people who live near to the proposed route, current users of the service and other potential users. We also consulted stakeholders including the affected Councils, traffic police, London TravelWatch, Members of Parliament, Assembly Members and local interest groups. A list of the stakeholders we consulted is shown in Appendix C and a summary of their responses is given in Section 4.

2.3 Consultation material, distribution and publicity The consultation was available on our consultation website http://consultations.tfl.gov.uk/orpington-buses

We sent an email to stakeholders with a link to the online consultation page.

We produced a 20 page A5 booklet outlining the proposals (Appendix A). We sent this to all residents within a 400 metre distance of the current and proposed routes (Appendix B). In total 32,500 leaflets were distributed.

We sent a supply of leaflets to

• Local GP surgeries (that agreed to keep a supply on display) • Orpington Hospital • Poverest Centre, Bromley Adult Education (after the drop in session)

The proposals for the R1 and R3 would mean that Tower Road would have buses operating along the road. Currently buses out of service use Tower Road. We sent a leaflet to all residents on Tower Road. The proposals for the R7 would mean that buses would use Blackbrook Lane and Bickley Park Road to and from Chislehurst. We sent leaflets to all residents along the affected parts of Blackbrook Lane and Bickley Park Road. 3

An A4 poster highlighting the consultation was displayed at stops along the routes where space was available.

The consultation was advertised in a press release to South London press on 5 February 2016.

An email containing a link to the online consultation was sent to registered users of Routes R1, R2, R3, R7 and R11. This email was sent out to 4,093 customers.

The leaflet mentioned that copies were available in large print, audio or another language through a Freephone number 0343 222 1155.

People were invited to respond to the consultation using a variety of methods. They could respond by accessing the online questionnaire; by using our freepost address at FREEPOST TFL CONSULTATIONS; by emailing [email protected] or by calling our Customer Contact Centre on 0343 222 1155.

The questionnaire asked twelve questions (eight generic and four specific). Of the generic questions we asked respondents for their name, email address, postcode, organisation name (if they were responding on behalf of an organisation), whether the respondent had a health problem or disability which limited their day to day activities, how they heard about the consultation, and views on the quality of the consultation. A copy of a paper questionnaire is shown in Appendix D.

There were four questions specific to the consultation:

• Question 1: How often do you use the bus routes? Respondents were given a choice of six answers: Daily, 2-3 times a week, Once a week, 1-2 times a month, Rarely, Never.

• Question 2: How will the proposed changes affect the length of your journey? Respondents were given a choice of five answers: my journey will be shorter, my journey will be longer, there will be no change to the length of my journey, I do not know what the impact will be, I do not use this route.

• Question 3: Do you support our proposals for routes R1, R2, R3, R7 and R11? Respondents were given four answers: yes, no, not sure, no opinion.

• Questions 4: Do you have any comments about the proposed changes to these bus routes (Please select the route/s you are commenting on). Respondents were given a “free text” box to share their views.

2.4 Meetings We met with Councillor Colin Smith and Bromley Council on 16 December 2016. During this meeting we explained the background to our proposals and gave details of the consultation.

We held three public drop-in sessions during the consultation period which enabled us to hand out leaflets, answer queries and encourage people to comment. Feedback forms were also available for those wishing to comment in writing. 4

The drop-in sessions took place as follows: • Chislehurst Library on Monday 15 February • Orpington Village Hall on Tuesday 16 February • The Poverest Centre, Bromley Adult Education on Thursday 25 February

The consultation material was also exhibited at the Opportunity Orpington business show on Thursday 18 February at Orpington Campus, Bromley College.

3 Responses from members of the public

3.1 Overview

We received 873 responses from members of the public. Of these, 563 (64%) were submitted online and 310 (36%) were submitted via post, email or consultation form.

We received a petition from residents of Brittenden Close and Wardensfield Close in Green Street Green. This was signed by 54 people. The petition is shown in Appendix E. A member of the consultation team acknowledged receipt of the petition and advised that the petition would be taken into consideration as part of the decision making process.

We asked members of the public how they found out about the consultation. The majority, 213 respondents (24%), did not provide an answer to the question while 179 (21%) received a letter from TfL, 136 (16%) received an email from TfL, 113 (13%) found out through social media, 66 (8%) found out through the press and 34 (4%) found out through the TfL website. There were 132 (15%) individuals who selected “Other” as an option and the most common means specified by respondents in this category was “Word of mouth” with 65 instances (7%).

Figure 3.1 How did you hear about this consultation? 260 240 220 200 180 160 140 120 100 80 60 40 20 0 Email Letter TfL Social No Press Other Total from TfL from TfL website media answer Responses 136 179 66 34 113 132 213 873 (%) 16% 21% 8% 4% 13% 15% 24% 100%

5

Figure 3.2 Which exhibition did you attend? 60

50

40

30

20

10

0 Bromley Adult Education Chislehurst Orpington Village Total (Poverest Library Hall Centre) Responses 23 11 55 89

We asked respondents if they attended a TfL exhibition and there were a total of 89 responses. The exhibition that received the highest number of responses was Orpington Village Hall with 55 responses this was followed by Bromley Adult Education (Poverest Centre) with 23 and lastly Chislehurst Library with 11.

Figure 3.3 Are your day-to-day activities limited because of a health problem or disability which has lasted, or is expected to last, at least 12 months? 380 360 340 320 300 280 260 240 220 200 180 160 140 120 100 80 60 40 20 0 Yes, Yes, Prefer not limited a No No answer Total limited a lot to say little Responses 74 121 370 71 237 873 (%) 8% 14% 42% 8% 27% 100%

6

We asked respondents whether their day to day activities were limited because of a health problem or disability which has lasted, or is expected to last, at least 12 months. A total of 237 respondents (27%) gave no answer while 370 respondents (42%) said no, 121 respondents (14%) said “Yes, limited a little”, 74 respondents (8%) said “Yes, limited a lot” and 71 respondents (8%) said they preferred not to say.

Table 3.1

Borough Response There were a total of 649 respondents who Bromley 617 provided their postcode and we received at least Bexley 12 one response from 10 of the London boroughs. Outside Greater There were 11 responses that came from outside London 11 Greater London. Greenwich 2 The vast majority of postcodes came from within Newham 1 the borough of Bromley with a total of 617 Lewisham 1 responses (95%). The borough of Bexley had the Wandsworth 1 second highest total with 12 responses (2%). Sutton 1 Croydon 1 Hillingdon 1 Lambeth 1

Figure 3.4

7

3.2 Public consultation results

To help us understand more about those who replied and their thoughts on the routes and proposals, we asked a number of questions.

Route R1

We asked respondents how often they used route R1.

Figure 3.5 How often do you use bus route R1? 160 140 120 100 80 60 40 20 0 2-3 times Once a 1-2 times Daily Rarely Never Total a week week a month Responses 81 111 45 51 75 101 464 (%) 17% 24% 10% 11% 16% 22% 100%

We asked how the proposed changes would affect the length of their journey.

Figure 3.6 How will the proposed changes affect the length of your journey? - Bus route R1 160 140 120 100 80 60 40 20 0 Journey Journey No change Impact Do not use will be will be to journey Total unknown route shorter longer length Responses 55 80 116 79 113 443 (%) 12% 18% 26% 18% 26% 100%

8

We asked respondents if they supported our proposals for route R1.

Figure 3.7 Do you support our proposals for route R1? 160

140

120

100

80

60

40

20

0 Yes No Not sure No opinion Total Responses 149 141 50 125 465 (%) 32% 30% 11% 27% 100%

A total of 464 individuals responded to the question on how often they used the R1 route. The majority of respondents, 111 (24%), stated that they used the R1 two to three times a week, this was followed by 101 respondents (22%) who never used the route. There were 81 respondents (17%) who used it daily, 75 respondents (16%) who used it rarely, 51 respondents (11%) using it one to two times a month and 45 individuals (10%) who used the route once a week.

We received 443 responses to the question of how the proposed changes to the R1 would affect the length of the respondents’ journey. There were 116 respondents (26%) that stated that there would be no change to their journey length followed by 113 respondents (26%) who did not use the route. A total of 80 respondents (18%) said that their journey will be longer, 79 (18%) who said that they did not know what the impact would be and 55 respondents (12%) who said their journey would be shorter.

There were 465 people who replied to the question of whether they supported the proposals for route R1 and of these 149 (32%) did support the proposals, 141 (30%) did not support, 125 (27%) had no opinion and 50 individuals (11%) were not sure.

9

Figure 3.8

Figure 3.9

10

Figure 3.10

Figure 3.8 is a postcode analysis of the responses to question 3 for route R1 and displays the level of support for the proposal in the vicinity of the route. Figure 3.8 displays the entirety of the R1 bus route while Figures 3.9 and 3.10 look more specifically at the southern and northern ends of the route. The overall picture from Figure 3.8 shows a high concentration of responses between the Green Street Green area and Sevenoaks Road as well as a high concentration of responses around the Poverest and St Paul’s Cray areas.

The overall response the proposal received from the southern section of the route can be seen in Figure 3.9. The section between Green Street Green via Chelsfield Station and to Sevenoaks Road has a very mixed response while along Sevenoaks Road and around Tower Road there is a very negative cluster of responses. There is a reasonable cluster of responses around Crofton Lane where there is a generally positive reception to the proposal along with a number of responses that were either “Not sure” or “No opinion”.

The northern section of the route again has a very mixed response type that can be seen in Figure 3.10. In the St Paul’s Cray section there is a slightly higher number of negative responses to the proposal and this is also true of the St Mary’s Cray section although there is a much higher proportion of “Not sure/No opinion” responses.

11

Route R2

We asked respondents how often they used route R2.

Figure 3.11 How often do you use bus route R2? 180 160 140 120 100 80 60 40 20 0 2-3 times Once a 1-2 times Daily Rarely Never Total a week week a month Responses 59 62 33 44 72 157 427 (%) 14% 15% 8% 10% 17% 37% 100%

We asked how the proposed changes would affect the length of their journey.

Figure 3.12 How will the proposed changes affect the length of your journey? - Bus route R2 180 160 140 120 100 80 60 40 20 0 Journey Journey No change Impact Do not use will be will be to journey Total unknown route shorter longer length Responses 14 73 84 61 176 408 (%) 3% 18% 21% 15% 43% 100%

12

We asked respondents if they supported our proposals for route R2.

Figure 3.13 Do you support our proposals for route R2? 180 160 140 120 100 80 60 40 20 0 Yes No Not sure No opinion Total Responses 118 113 37 172 440 (%) 27% 26% 8% 39% 100%

A total of 427 individuals responded to the question on how often they used the R2 route. The majority of respondents, 157 (37%), stated that they never used the route and this was followed by 72 respondents (17%) stating that they used it rarely. There were 62 individuals (15%) who said they used it two to three times a week, 59 (14%) who used it daily, 44 (10%) used it once or twice a month and 33 individuals (8%) who used it once a week.

We received 408 responses to the question of how the proposed changes to the R2 would affect the length of the respondents’ journey. There were 176 responses (43%) who said they do not use the route while 84 respondents (21%) said that it would not change their journey length, 73 respondents (18%) said that their journey would be longer, 61 (15%) did not know what the impact would be and 14 respondents (3%) said their journey would be shorter.

There were 440 people who replied to the question of whether they supported the proposals for route R2 and of these 172 (39%) had no opinion, 118 (27%) did support the proposal, 113 (26%) did not support the proposal and 37 individuals (8%) were not sure.

13

Figure 3.14

Figure 3.15

14

Figure 3.16

Figure 3.14 shows the responses received for question 3 with respect to route R2. The vast majority of responses came from the Orpington area while the Biggin Hill area received only four responses. Figure 3.15 shows in more detail the northern section of the route and it is possible to see that there is a large cluster of negative responses specifically around the Poverest Road area. Respondents from St Paul’s Cray, Chislehurst and Bickley areas had predominantly selected either “No opinion” or “Not sure”. There is also a small cluster of positive responses to the south of Petts Wood through to Crofton Lane.

Figure 3.16 shows the southern extent of the route and, as was mentioned earlier, there is a minimal response rate from the Biggin Hill area while around the Green Street Green and Chelsfield areas the response predominantly falls in to the category of “Other” with a small majority of positive responses over negative responses.

15

Route R3

We asked respondents how often they used route R3.

Figure 3.17 How often do you use bus route R3? 180 160 140 120 100 80 60 40 20 0 2-3 times Once a 1-2 times Daily Rarely Never Total a week week a month Responses 93 81 40 53 86 125 478 (%) 19% 17% 8% 11% 18% 26% 100%

We asked how the proposed changes would affect the length of their journey.

Figure 3.18 How will the proposed changes affect the length of your journey? - Bus route R3 180 160 140 120 100 80 60 40 20 0 Journey Journey No change Impact Do not use will be will be to journey Total unknown route shorter longer length Responses 30 122 84 82 140 458 (%) 7% 27% 18% 18% 31% 100%

16

We asked respondents if they supported our proposals for route R3.

Figure 3.19 Do you support our proposals for route R3? 180 160 140 120 100 80 60 40 20 0 Yes No Not sure No opinion Total Responses 138 167 55 122 482 (%) 29% 35% 11% 25% 100%

A total of 478 individuals responded to the question on how often they used the R3 route. The majority of respondents, 125 (26%), stated that they never used the route and this was followed by 93 respondents (19%) stating that they used it daily. There were 86 respondents (18%) who used it rarely, 81 (17%) who used it two to three times a week, 53 (11%) used it once or twice a month and 40 respondents (8%) used it once a week.

We received 458 responses to the question of how the proposed changes to the R3 would affect the length of the respondents’ journey. There were 140 respondents (31%) who said they do not use the route while 122 respondents (27%) said that it would make their journey longer, 84 respondents (18%) said that there would be no change to their journey, 82 (18%) said they did not know what the impact would be while 30 individuals (7%) said their journey would be shorter.

There were 482 people who replied to the question of whether they supported the proposals for route R3 and of these 167 (35%) did not support the proposal, 138 (29%) did support the proposal, 122 (25%) had no opinion on the matter and 55 individuals (11%) were not sure.

17

Figure 3.20

Figure 3.21

18

Figure 3.22

The responses to question 3 for route R3 have been mapped and are displayed in Figure 3.20. The overall picture shows a very high density of responses around the Repton Road and Charterhouse Road area as well as a very high density of responses around the Poverest Road area. There is also a consistent response rate for the eastern section of the route between Petts Wood and the junction of Crofton Lane with Crofton Road.

Figure 3.21 takes a closer look at the southern section of the route which shows a very negative response rate that stretches from Tower Road down through Charterhouse Road. Between Green Street Green and Charterhouse Road there is a more mixed response with an increase in “Other” as a response and towards Jubilee Road in the south eastern section of the route there is a small cluster of negative responses.

Figure 3.22 shows that there is a positive response to the proposal along Crofton Lane and this positive reaction continues to follow the route along until it reaches the Petts Wood area. Along the Poverest Road section, where the proposal diverts the route away from the road and covers the section around Amherst Drive, there is a very strong negative response especially to the south of Poverest Road. Around the Amherst Drive section of the route there is a far more mixed reception to the proposal and to the north of St Mary’s Cray there is a prevalence of positive responses as well as other. Elsewhere there is a completely neutral reception to the proposal particularly in the St Paul’s Cray and Bickley areas.

19

Route R7

We asked respondents how often they used route R7.

Figure 3.23 How often do you use bus route R7? 220 200 180 160 140 120 100 80 60 40 20 0 2-3 times Once a 1-2 times Daily Rarely Never Total a week week a month Responses 23 37 17 28 95 202 402 (%) 6% 9% 4% 7% 24% 50% 100%

We asked how the proposed changes would affect the length of their journey.

Figure 3.24 How will the proposed changes affect the length of your journey? - Bus route R7 220 200 180 160 140 120 100 80 60 40 20 0 Journey Journey No change Impact Do not use will be will be to journey Total unknown route shorter longer length Responses 38 18 85 58 217 416 (%) 9% 4% 19% 13% 49% 100%

20

We asked respondents if they supported our proposals for route R7.

Figure 3.25 Do you support our proposals for route R7? 220 200 180 160 140 120 100 80 60 40 20 0 Yes No Not sure No opinion Total Responses 168 66 42 160 436 (%) 39% 15% 10% 37% 100%

There were 402 responses to the question regarding how often respondents used the bus route R7. A total of 202 respondents (50%) said they never used the route while 95 (24%) said they rarely used it. We received 37 responses (9%) from individuals who stated they used it two to three times a week, 28 responses (7%) said they used it once or twice a month, 23 responses (6%) were from users who used it daily and finally 17 responses (4%) from those who used it once a week.

A total of 416 responses were received for the question regarding how our proposed changes to the R7 route would affect the length of the respondents’ journey. There were 217 responses (49%) that stated that the respondents did not use the route, while 85 respondents (19%) said there would be no change in their journey length, 58 (13%) said they did not know what the impact would be, 38 (9%) said their journey would be shorter and 18 (4%) said their journey would be longer.

We received 436 responses to the question of whether individuals supported our proposals for route R7. We had 168 responses (39%) that were in favour of our proposals, 160 responses (37%) that were of no opinion, 66 responses (15%) that were against the proposals and 42 responses (10%) that were not sure.

21

Figure 3.26

Figure 3.27

22

Figure 3.28

Figure 3.26 shows the response distribution to the level of support for the proposal of route R7. There are high response rates along the route as well as in the areas of Green Street Green and St Paul’s Cray. Away from the major clusters there are also above average response rates in the areas of Chelsfield and Chislehurst.

The northern section of the route is shown in Figure 3.27. Around the Chislehurst War Memorial stop and up to the high street there are a sparse number of responses with a general leaning towards a positive reception to the scheme. There is a cluster of negative responses around Hawthorne Road although interspersed with a number of positive responses. Following the route through to Petts Wood and beyond there are a string of positive responses in very close proximity to the route. There are a very large number of responses between the St Paul’s Cray and St Mary’s Cray section that are predominantly “Other”.

The southern section of the route can be seen in Figure 3.28 and the positive responses to the proposal can be seen to continue along from Petts Wood through to the Crofton Lane area. Around Charterhouse Road there is a very mixed response with almost equal numbers between the positive, negative and other response types. In Green Street Green it is predominantly neutral while down to Chelsfield Village there is a mixed reception to the proposal.

23

Route R11

We asked respondents how often they used route R11.

Figure 3.29 How often do you use bus route R11? 160 140 120 100 80 60 40 20 0 2-3 times Once a 1-2 times Daily Rarely Never Total a week week a month Responses 99 124 53 75 66 83 500 (%) 20% 25% 11% 15% 13% 17% 100%

We asked how the proposed changes would affect the length of their journey.

Figure 3.30 How will the proposed changes affect the length of your journey? - Bus route R11 160 140 120 100 80 60 40 20 0 Journey Journey No change Impact Do not use will be will be to journey Total unknown route shorter longer length Responses 84 139 75 82 91 471 (%) 18% 30% 16% 17% 19% 100%

24

We asked respondents if they supported our proposals for route R11.

Figure 3.31 Do you support our proposals for route R11? 260 240 220 200 180 160 140 120 100 80 60 40 20 0 Yes No Not sure No opinion Total Responses 124 236 37 98 495 (%) 25% 48% 7% 20% 100%

In response to the question regarding how often individuals used the R11 route we received 500 responses. The most popular response to the question was two to three times a week with 124 responses (25%) and this was followed by daily with 99 responses (20%). There were 83 respondents (17%) who never use the service, 75 respondents (15%) who used it once or twice a month, 66 respondents (13%) rarely used it and 53 (11%) used it once a week.

On how the proposed changes to the R11 route would affect respondents we received 471 responses. There were 139 responses (30%) that stated the proposals would increase the journey length, while 91 (19%) of responses stated that the individual did not use the route. There were 84 responses (18%) for the journey reducing in length, 82 (17%) which stated that the impact would be unknown and finally 75 (16%) that said there would be change in journey length.

In total there were 495 responses to the question on whether individuals supported the proposals for route R11. There were 236 responses (48%) that were against the proposals, 124 (25%) that supported the proposals, 98 (20%) that had no opinion and 37 (7%) who were not sure.

25

Figure 3.32

Figure 3.33

26

Figure 3.34

For route R11 the full extent of postcode responses is shown in Figure 3.32. It shows that there is a very heavy response rate along the entirety of the route. Focussing on the southern section of the route around Orpington Hospital, which can be seen more clearly in Figure 3.33, it is possible to see a very negative reception to the proposal particularly in the Green Street Green area that stretches up to Warren Road and over to Southlands and Northlands Avenues. There is a more mixed response along the Charterhouse and Repton Road area while the area around Sevenoaks Road and Tower Road is much more negative towards the proposal.

Figure 3.34 looks closer at the northern section of the route that stretches from Queen Mary’s Hospital through to St Mary’s Cray. Around the Sidcup area there are very few responses but further south in the St Paul’s Cray section there is an overwhelming negative response which continues down to St Mary’s Cray station. Below this point there is a more mixed reaction in the Poverest Road and St Mary’s Cray area.

27

In the consultation we asked one open question with regards to the proposals. Question 4 asked respondents if they had any comments about the proposed changes to the routes. Respondents were given the option to select tick boxes that corresponded to the routes they were discussing and were allowed to tick more than one box. Figure 3.35 shows the total number of respondents who selected each tick box for the corresponding routes. Route R11 received the most selections with 306 individuals (29% of all ticks recorded) selecting this tick box, this was followed by R3 with 240 (23%), R7 with 197 (19%), R1 with 179 (17%) and finally R2 with 139 (13%).

Figure 3.35 Do you have any comments about the proposed changes to these bus routes? 350

300

250

200

150

100

50

0 Bus route Bus route Bus route Bus route Bus route Total R1 R2 R3 R7 R11 Responses 179 139 240 197 306 1061 (%) 17% 13% 23% 19% 29% 100%

Due to the complexity of the proposed changes and the number of issues that apply to more than one route, a number of frameworks were created to analyse the responses. Although the predominant number of issues could be attributed to an individual route it was necessary to create comments that were shared between bus routes, most notably the R1 and R3, the R1 and R11 and the R2 and R3. Across all the frameworks there were a total of 580 comments that were created to record a total of 3335 points. The individual frameworks can be seen in Appendix F.

For route R1 there was a total of 67 comments created to record a total of 760 points. Table 3.2 shows the top 15 comments for route R1, which account for 59% of all comments made. The top three comments all focus on the frequency of the route with 48 people stating they did not want the frequency to be reduced, 17 people stating that the reduced frequency would increase passenger congestion at peak times and 14 people said that the frequency at peak times should remain at 15 minutes.

28

Table 3.2 R1 - Top comments Negative: Do not reduce current frequency 48 Negative: Reduced frequency would increase passenger congestion on bus at 17 peak/school times. Negative: Frequency at peak times should remain at 15 mins 14 Current issues: Tight turns for Repton Road, Sevenoaks Road & Tower Road difficult 14 for buses and will cause congestion Current issues: Current route is unreliable; will proposal make the R1 run on time? 12 Suggestions: Introduce new bus stop around junction between Tower Road, 10 Sevenoaks Road and Repton Road Negative: Crossing Sevenoaks Road will cause traffic on Tower Road and Repton 9 Road Negative: R1 is only bus to serve Repton Road and Charterhouse Road and 9 reduction of frequency is retrograde step Negative: Reduced frequency would increase waiting times 9 Negative: Reduced frequency would affect daily commute 8 Negative: Would negatively affect older, disabled or vulnerable customers 8 Positive: Going via Tower Road reduces traffic at War memorial Roundabout and on 8 Station Road Negative: New route through Tower Road will delay route 7 Negative: Would increase journey time 7 Positive: General comment 7

For route R2 there were a total of 58 comments that were created to record 221 individual points and table 3.3 shows the top 16 comments that accounted for 60% of all comments. The majority of the top comments remark about the removal of a section of the route with 14 comments asking for the route to not be changed and 12 negative comments regarding the removal of the Petts Wood to Orpington section, and with 12 comments stating it would affect the daily commute.

Table 3.3 R2 - Top comments Negative: Do not change route 14 Negative: Removal of Petts Wood to Orpington section 12 Negative: Would affect daily commute 12 Negative: Requires getting a second bus 11 Negative: Reduction of bus options from Petts Wood 10 Current issues: Route has always been unreliable 9 Negative: R2 not serving Poverest Road 8 Negative: Increase in journey time 7 Positive: No issue with route change 7 Positive: Positive if changes ensure improved service 7 Negative: Increase in journey cost 6 Negative: School children would have to change bus/wait in the cold 6 Negative: Would negatively affect elderly/people with less mobility 6 Positive: Shortening route will improve reliability/fewer delays 6 Suggestions: Buses should run at either 15 or 20 min frequencies 6 29

Suggestions: Introduce Sunday/Bank Holiday service 6

There were a total of 100 comments created for the R3 route that were used to describe over 329 points. The top 16 comments are shown below, table 3.4, and summarise over 53% of all points made. There was a strong positive reaction to the increase in frequency of the route and this was followed closely by negative comments that stated that the current route should be maintained and that the changes would increase journey time. A number of individuals misunderstood the proposal and did not realise that the R7 would replace the section to Chelsfield village that is being removed from the R3 route.

Table 3.4 R3 - Top comments Positive: Increase in frequency 22 Negative: Maintain current route 19 Negative: Would increase journey time 17 Positive: General comment 12 Negative: Would affect daily commute 11 Misunderstanding: R7 will cover section to Charterhouse Road/Chelsfield village 11 removed by R3 Negative: No longer serves Charterhouse Road 9 Negative: Proposed frequency means 1 less BPH for Orpington Hospital 9 Negative: Would affect elderly or disabled customers 9 Positive: Amherst drive residents pleased over weekend and evening service 9 Current issues: Service needs to be reliable 9 Negative: Proposals remove access to Station Approach from Chelsfield village, 8 would make customers miss trains Negative: Route will run too frequently through Amherst residential areas especially 8 on Sundays Negative: Popular route for commuters between Orpington station and Chelsfield 7 village Positive: Links PRUH with Orpington Hospital 7 Suggestions: Sync R3 and 273 to be separated by 10 min intervals 7

There were 615 points made about the proposals for route R7 and these were summarised into 142 comments. The top 16 comments are shown in table 3.5 and these make up 48% of all comments made. The increase in frequency for the R7 was welcomed and received more than double the number of comments, with 55, compared to the second placed comments. There are three joint second places comments all with 22 occurrences. The first is a negative comment that highlights the fact the proposed route will no longer provide access to Station Approach, the second is a positive general comment and the third is a suggestion to extend the route to Chislehurst High Street.

Table 3.5 R7 - Top comments Positive: Increased frequency to 30 mins 55 Negative: Proposals do not provide access to Station Approach, necessary for 22 disabled access and commuters Positive: General comment 22 Suggestions: Extend route to Green Lane Belmont Lane stop/Gordon Arms to serve 22 Chislehurst High Street and Sainsbury's 30

Positive: Extension of route to Chislehurst War Memorial 21 Negative: Route has low demand 19 Positive: Introduction of Sunday service 19 Negative: Going via Walnuts Centre before heading to Orpington Station will delay 18 commuters from Charterhouse Road & Chelsfield Village Positive: Extension of route to Chelsfield 15 Negative: Do not use or add stand capacity at Chislehurst War Mem as would cause 14 traffic and impact nature of the area Negative: Will increase journey times 13 Negative: Bickley area to Chislehurst already has multiple transport options (269/162) 12 Negative: Would increase congestion 12 Negative: Would increase pollution 10 Positive: Benefits elderly and disabled customers 10 Positive: Enables access between Chislehurst and Orpington 10

Route R11 received the highest number of comments with 1327 that could be sorted in to 109 comments. Table 3.6 shows the top 16 comments that over 70% of all comments can be attributed to. The most popular are all negative and many relate to the removal of access to Orpington Hospital and the Tesco at Foots Cray. The most mentioned comment, with 159, was that the proposals would negatively affect the disabled, elderly or parents with children. This was followed by, to not remove Orpington Hospital from the route with 120 comments, then with, 101 comments, was that it would require customers to take a second bus and with 98 comments was the comment that highlights the steep hill between Sevenoaks Road and Orpington Hospital.

Table 3.6 R11 - Top comments Negative: Would negatively affect the disabled, elderly or parents with children 159 Negative: Do not remove Orpington Hospital stop from route 120 Negative: Would require taking a second bus 101 Negative: Steep hill between Sevenoaks Road and Orpington Hospital making it 98 difficult for less mobile customers Negative: Would lose direct link between Green Street Green and Orpington 81 Hospital Negative: Many people rely on R11 in order to attend Orpington Hospital 59 Negative: Do not remove Foots Cray Tesco stop from route 56 Negative: Would lose direct link between St Mary Cray/St Paul’s Cray and Tesco 42 Negative: Only adds a small amount of time to visit Orpington Hospital. 40 Negative: Many people rely on R11 to do their shopping at Tesco 34 Negative: Route is used by those who do not have alternative means of transport to 30 reach Orpington Hospital or Tesco Negative: Would increase journey time 30 Negative: Proposed R3 does not call at Green Street Green to replace R11 28 Negative: Would lose direct link between St Paul's Cray and Orpington Hospital 28 Negative: Would increase difficulty of journey 27 Negative: Would increase journey cost 27

31

Table 3.7 shows the top 11 comments that could be attributed to both the R1 and R3 and predominantly feature issues regarding buses using Tower Road. In total there were 314 points that were made and these were summarised into 60 comments. The top comments make up over 66% of all the points made and heavily feature negative comments regarding buses using Tower Road and how this will affect the congestion on Tower Road itself as well as at the junctions of Station Road and Sevenoaks Road.

Table 3.7 R1 & R3 - Top comments Negative: Entering and exiting Tower Road from Station Road may increase 30 congestion on Station Road Negative: Route should not travel down Tower Road (maintain Sevenoaks Road 29 section) Negative: Tower Road is a residential street and more buses will add to congestion 26 Negative: Congestion at peak school time and parked cars will cause more 25 congestion and delay buses on Tower Road Negative: Turning right from Tower Road to Sevenoaks Road will cause 22 problems/congestion Negative: Bus stops on Sevenoaks Road no longer being served 20 Negative: Will create safety concerns on Tower Road 18 Positive: Using Tower Road will save time 14 Negative: Bus will wait a long time to exit Tower Road on to Station Road 8 Negative: No longer provides access to GP surgeries on Sevenoaks Road, would 8 make patients have to walk further Negative: People use Tower Road as a rat run 8

The remaining tables for R1 & R11, R2 & R3 and other combination of routes can be seen in Appendix F. The main points for the R1 & R11 were that it should be extended to Princess Royal University Hospital (PRUH), that currently there is an issue with the R1, R11 and B14 all arriving at same time at stops and that the R1 should be extended to Foots Cray Tesco to cover the R11 removal. The R2 and the R3 comments focussed predominantly around how the proposal will leave Poverest Road with a reduced service and the effect this will have on customers. There were 19 comments raising the issue that the removal of routes from Poverest Road will force elderly customers to walk further along a steep road and 16 comments stated that only the route 273 would now serve Poverest Road and that this bus did not go via Orpington Town centre. There were a number of comments that fell into a “General” category and the top three comments for this category were “Out of scope for this consultation” with 39 comments, “Negative comment” with 19 and “Positive comment” with 10.

There was one open question regarding the consultation process itself which asked respondents to tell us about what they thought of the quality of the consultation. There were 463 responses to this question and again a framework was produced in order to summarise the issues raised. In total 112 comments were created to summarise 874 points and table 3.8 shows the top 14 comments. The top six comments are all positive with a general positive comment being recorded 126 times, followed by “Good information” with 108 comments and then a comment stating the consultation was clear with 78 comments. The first negative comment was that the individual did not receive a leaflet in the post with 25 comments.

32

Table 3.8 Quality of this consultation - Top comments Positive: General comment 126 Positive: Good information 108 Positive: Clear 78 Positive: Good/clear maps 46 Positive: Good printed material 40 Positive: Easy to read / understand 30 Negative: Did not receive leaflet in post 25 Negative: Not advertised widely enough 24 Negative: General comment 21 Negative: Only found out by chance 17 Positive: Concise &/or Comprehensive 16 Concern: Will comments be listened to 16 Other: Out of context for this consultation 16 Concern: Consultation will not affect outcome 15

33

4 Responses from statutory bodies and other stakeholders

We received 21 responses from stakeholders and these are summarised below. These summaries intend to condense what were in some cases, very detailed responses. This is to enable readers of this report to understand more easily the feedback received. The original, uncondensed stakeholder responses were used for analysis purposes.

Affinity Sutton Raised concerns regarding the R11 not serving Orpington Hospital, especially for residents living in the Green Street Green area.

Oppose the R11 change because the elderly and/or those having disabilities would have to walk from the main road up the hill to the hospital, get a bus into Orpington High Street and come back on the R3 or use other transportation such as a taxi.

Bexley Clinical Commissioning Group (CCG) Bexley had many services taken away at their main hospital (Queen Mary’s Sidcup). Residents were promised enhanced transport routes to make sure that they had access to other hospitals in other boroughs. Bexley CCG feel it is very hard for residents to easily access Dareth Valley Hospital, Queen Elizabeth Woolwich or the PRU in Bromley. The proposed changes to the R11 bus route will make it even harder for Bexley residents to access the NHS.

They think the proposed changes to the R11 route could cause hardship/difficulty to elderly or less mobile patients who would no longer be able to access a bus service that directly links with the Orpington Hospital site. Bexley residents could see their journey times to the hospital extended under these new proposals. In December 2015 the Patient Council undertook a ‘walk my shoes’ visit to the site in question and it took one hour and 20 mins each way (using route 229 then route R11 to Orpington. If the R11 ceases to serve Orpington Hospital Bexley residents would need to use 3 buses to access the site or negotiate a good 20-minute walk from Orpington High Street. Many elderly patients depend on this service – or those with young children and no access to a car.

They feel that Bexley residents are being short changed in terms of access to hospital services and these proposals to the bus routes will increase the burden on frail, elderly residents who rely on it to get treatment. For these reasons Bexley CCG oppose any changes to the R11 bus route.

Bromley Neighbourhood Watch Association Commented that routes 273 and R2 currently use the bus stand at Petts Wood which blocks the bus stop and makes it difficult for R3 buses to drop off and pick up passengers. They also feel drivers should read the notices about switching engines off and not smoke while standing on the platform with the door open.

Bromley Safer Transport Team Have no issues that would affect them operationally.

34

Chislehurst and St Pauls Cray Commons Conservators Commented specifically on the proposals for route R7. They do not support the proposal to use either Royal Parade or Chislehurst War Memorial as a terminus point for route R7 because it would add to the congestion in the area. Alternatively, if an extension of the R7 to Chislehurst is justified then they feel it would be more useful to run to Chislehurst High Street and use a bus stand outside Belmont Parade in Green Lane.

CRA20ten Route R11 Object to the proposal for route R11 not serving Tesco. They suggested a compromise routeing where the R11 towards Queen Mary’s Hospital should continue to serve Tesco Sidcup and towards Green Street Green the route may stop serving Tesco Sidcup. The R11 is used by the heavily populated areas of Cray Valley West, Cray Valley East and Old St Pauls Cray Village.

CRA20ten also feel strongly about the proposal not to serve Orpington Hospital as the walk from the stop on Sevenoaks Road to the hospital entrance is difficult for the infirm and elderly. Although noted that the R3 would provide a service to the hospital they feel the additional bus journey is inconvenient and costly.

Ultimately they suggest the the R11 remains as it is currently and the current frequency is sufficient.

Route R3 Although it seems sensible to provide a link between Orpington and The Princess Royal hospitals, it would be a lengthy routeing. They suspect few people will take advantage of the proposed routeing. However they have suggested a more direct route between the two hospitals via Farnborough Hill/Way.

Cray Valley Residents Panel / Star Lane Residents Association The proposed changes to the R11 will not be of benefit to the residents of Cray Valley East or West. They feel that the route must continue to serve Orpington Hospital as a lot of people from these areas attend the hospital on a regular basis. The steep hill to the hospital entrance would be very difficult for the elderly and less able. Similarly residents without a car rely on the service to Tesco on Edgington Way.

Cray Valley East Ward, Councillor Chris Pierce Fully supports local residents wanting the R11 service to Orpington Hospital retained.

Relying on one bus direct to the hospital or, expecting people to walk up the steep hill from the bus stop on the main road is unacceptable.

Also requests that the direct R11 service to Tesco at Sidcup is retained.

Green Street Green Association Many users of the R11 are those attending the Orthopaedic unit meaning they cannot walk far. Travelling to the hospital from the south would mean changing to another bus going in the opposite direction, i.e. get off the R11 from Green Street Green, cross the road and walk to the opposite direction bus stop to pick up the R3 – all for a couple of minutes saving for the R11.

35

Kent Association for the Blind The R11 proposal no longer serving Orpington Hospital will cause many people severe difficulty. Sight impaired people rely on having regular, familiar routes to destinations they use frequently so that they can build a mental picture of the route and know exactly where to board and alight from the bus, and how to reach the entrance to the building they need. Changing the route will mean they have to learn an entire new route as they will be obliged to change to another bus route, which takes a long time to establish. Appropriate mobility training and practice is undertaken over an extended period of time to enable a sight impaired person to manage independently. Changing to another bus will also extend the journey time.

For anyone who is unable to manage to learn a new route or does not have the stamina to undertake two buses to get to the hospital, would be faced with a long uphill walk, negotiating a busy mini roundabout which does not have a crossing.

The difficulties described apply to anyone with reduced mobility and not just those with sight impairment, although the latter will be at much higher risk of serious injury.

The few minutes that would be saved by re-routeing the R11 to stop on the main road instead of the hospital do not justify the very significant risk to safety that this proposed change will place on already vulnerable people, and the proposed change should therefore be abandoned.

Kings College Hospital NHS Foundation Trust Route R3 Welcome and support proposals to establish a direct bus link between the PRUH, Orpington Hospital and Orpington Station which will improve overall patient experience. The link between Orpington Station and Orpington hospital is a priority area of transport provision.

Route R11 Currently provides a link between Queen Mary’s Hospital and Orpington Hospital therefore they do not support the R11 proposal. Hospital staff use the current R11 to travel between Sidcup and Orpington to get to work.

Kings College Hospital NHS Trust would prefer that current links are not lost. There is increasing patient activity at Orpington Hospital which is bringing more people to the local area and with the enforcement of new controlled parking measures around the site, public transport options will be relied upon more than ever.

Knoll Residents Association Tower Road is fairly narrow and not suited to bus traffic, which will cause congestion. This area is already congested in peak hours and turning a bus is likely to be difficult and cause additional traffic congestion. They feel the existing routeing via Sevenoaks Road is more suited to bus traffic than Tower Road.

London Borough of Bexley London Borough of Bexley raises concerns and oppose changes which affect the opportunities for patients to use public transport and travel between health providers and sites.

36

There are various changes aiming to improve health and integrated care across South East London, which is likely to change the way in which some health services, including those at Queen Mary’s Hospital, Orpington and PRUH are delivered.

Therefore the proposed changes to the R11 would not be beneficial at this time.

London Borough of Bromley London Borough of Bromley are aware of the concerns that have been raised regarding the proposal for the R11 to not serve Orpington Hospital and would ask that this is reviewed. Otherwise they remain supportive overall of the proposed changes.

London TravelWatch Do not support the reduction of frequency of route R1 because it would lose the co- ordination with train services to and from central London at Orpington station. The R1 should remain at a 15 minute interval.

The proposals for route R7 are welcomed, but London TravelWatch recommend that the terminal arrangements at Chislehurst be revised to serve the shopping area better, and enable better interchange with other bus routes. This should either be an extension to serve the Gordon Arms but stand or via Prince Imperial Road and Centre Common Road.

Longbury Residents Association The direct service to Orpington hospital is heavily relied upon for residents living in the North western section of St Paul’s Cray estate, especially the senior citizens who would struggle to walk up the steep hill to the hospital entrance. The existing R11, including Tesco Sidcup runs perfectly well for these residents and there is no need to make any changes to what is already a reliable and well used service.

They have suggested that double yellow lines could be installed opposite numbers 291 - 307 Chipperfield Road to prevent vehicles parking and provide quicker journey times.

Orpington Priory Community Hub Orpington Priory Community Hub is a newly formed charity and is in negotiations with Bromley council to take on the lease of the Priory buildings (the old museum and library) and turn it into a hub which will be beneficial to the health and wellbeing of the local community.

They have asked us to look into two suggestions: • Could an Orpington High Street service be re-routed to circulate through the area at the front of the Priory Buildings to improve access for users, especially the less able. • Could a bus service be re-routed to serve Court Road between Ramsden Road and Spur Road.

Petts Wood & District Residents Association Generally feel that the proposals appear to be sensible and well considered in trying to achieve greater reliability of services and balance of demand and capacity, but with inevitable ‘winners’ and ‘losers’.

They fully support the proposed changes to route R7 and are happy to see the restoration of a ‘clock-face’ timetable but also providing a level of service which has 37

been sought in the past. They have a slight reservation in respect of the Chislehurst extension which could see traffic congestion in the area affecting reliability. However on the positive side linking Chislehurst, Bickley and Petts Wood railway stations and for students accessing Coopers School in Chislehurst, and Bromley Girls High School in Blackbrook Lane could be quite beneficial.

With regard to the R3 proposals, they generally support these, but have some concerns about the additional time to Orpington from the diversion into the Amherst Drive area to replace the R2 service. It is likely that some residents of Poverest Road who lose the R2 service will object, however the distances to stops are not unreasonable.

It has been suggested that routes R3 and 273 buses leaving Petts Wood station could be arranged to depart at 10 minute intervals. This would provide an even service along Petts Wood Road and Poverest Road to compensate for the loss of the R2.

The negotiation of the Tower Road/Station Road junction by the R1 and R3 could be problematic in terms of congestion on Station Road. There is already considerable congestion at Tower Road during peak periods. However the idea of using Tower Road if practical is logical.

They have also requested whether TfL would consider a new stop for the R7 along the section of Crofton Lane between St Johns Road and the junction with Towncourt Lane. A review was carried out a few years ago and a site was identified in both directions near Dalewood Road. This could be a useful additional stop to residents especially with proposed improvements for route R7.

Pratts Bottom Residents Association The proposals do not serve the people of Pratts Bottom and the villages who have to survive on an infrequent and in the evenings and Sundays, non-existent bus service.

The Chislehurst Society Commented specifically on the proposals for route R7. They recognise that a more frequent bus service from Chislehurst to Orpington and Chelsfield may be welcomed by some users. However they feel that an extension to Chislehurst War Memorial would present some issues.

There is not enough space at Chislehurst War Memorial for another bus service to stand. Adding another bus service to turn around here would make congestion worse.

They would object to creating additional stand space on Royal Parade and remain in objection to a previous proposal to build a toilet for bus drivers on Royal Parade.

They question the need for an additional bus service between Bickley and Chislehurst and feel that it has not been made clear why it is needed.

38

Tower Pre-school Raise concerns about the safety of children arriving and departing from Tower Pre- school which is based at Orpington Baptist Church with the entrance to the pre-school on Tower Road.

There is currently only a small railing outside the pre-school stopping children running into the road. However if buses are re-routed down Tower Road it will make the road busier and more dangerous for children.

When the school opens and closes there is a queue of traffic up Tower Road waiting to turn onto Station Road. If this queue included buses the visibility of drivers would be impaired and may not see children and parents trying to cross the road.

They would prefer that the safety of children is considered and that the bus route changes do not go ahead.

If the bus proposals were to go ahead they ask that specific safety measures such as: double yellow lines or zig zag lines outside the school, double the length of metal railing to stop children running into the road, pedestrian crossing somewhere safe for children and parents and trees along the pavement where possible to decrease noise pollution.

Tower Pre-school have also asked for funding for double glazing and changing ramps/steps to be made safer.

39

Appendix A – Consultation materials

Email to stakeholders

40

Email to registered to Oyster card holders

41

Consultation Leaflet

42

43

44

45

46

47

48

49

50

51

52

Bus stop posters

53

Local press release

54

Appendix B – Leaflet distribution area

• Leaflets were delivered to letterboxes within a 400 metres radius of roads along current/proposed roads to be served. The approximate area is shown on the following maps.

55

56

57

Appendix C – List of stakeholders consulted

London TravelWatch

Elected Members Gareth Bacon AM Andrew Boff AM James Cleverly AM Mary-Clare Connellan Tom Copley AM Nicky Gavron AM Darren Johnson AM Jenny Jones AM Stephen Knight AM Joanne McCartney AM Caroline Pidgeon AM Murad Qureshi AM Valerie Shawcross AM Richard Tracey AM Fiona Twycross AM Jo Johnson MP Dr Mathias MP Bob Neill MP Bob Stewart MP Cllr Kate Lymer Bickley Ward, Bromley Cllr Catherine Rideout Bickley Ward, Bromley Cllr Colin Smith Bickley Ward, Bromley Cllr Lydia Buttinger Chelsfield and Pratts Bottom Ward, Bromley Cllr Samaris Hungtington-Thresher Chelsfield and Pratts Bottom Ward, Bromley Cllr Keith Onslow Chelsfield and Pratts Bottom Ward, Bromley Cllr Eric Bosshard Chislehurst Ward, Bromley Cllr Katy Boughey Chislehurst Ward, Bromley Cllr Ian F Payne Chislehurst Ward, Bromley Cllr Teresa Ball Cray Valley East Ward, Bromley Cllr Angela Page Cray Valley East Ward, Bromley Cllr Chris Pierce Cray Valley East Ward, Bromley Cllr Judi Ellis Cray Valley West Ward, Bromley Cllr David Livett Cray Valley West Ward, Bromley Cllr Terence Nathan Cray Valley West Ward, Bromley Cllr Robert Evans Farnborough and Crofton Ward, Bromley Cllr Charles Jowel Farnborough and Crofton Ward, Bromley Cllr Tim Stevens J.P. Farnborough and Crofton Ward, Bromley Cllr Kim Bottin Orpington Ward, Bromley Cllr William Hungtington-Thresher Orpington Ward, Bromley Cllr Pauline Tunnicliffe Orpington Ward, Bromley Cllr Douglas Auld Petts Wood and Knoll Ward, Bromley Cllr Simon Fawthrop Petts Wood and Knoll Ward, Bromley Cllr Tony Owen Petts Wood and Knoll Ward, Bromley

58

Local Authorities London Borough of Bromley London Councils Greater London Authority

Police & Health Authorities Bromley Safer Transport Team King’s College Hospital NHS Foundation Trust London Ambulance Service Metropolitan Police NHS CCG Bromley

Transport Groups AA Motoring Trust Association of British Drivers Association of Car Fleet Operators British Motorcyclists Federation Campaign for Better Transport CTC, national cycling charity Department for Transport Freight Transport Association Green Flag Group Licensed Taxi Drivers Association London City Airport London Cycling Campaign Motorcycle Action Group Motorcycle Industry Association Road Haulage Association Taxi and Private Hire

Accessibility Groups Action on Hearing Loss (Formerly RNID) Age Concern London Age UK Alzheimers' Society Asian Peoples Disabilities Alliance Better Transport Brent Mencap Campaign for Better Transport Disability Alliance Disability Rights UK Disabled Persons Transport Advisory Committee Greater London Forum for the Elderly Guide Dogs for the Blind Association Harrow Association for Disabled People Joint Committee on Mobility of Blind and Partially Sighted People Joint Mobility Unit Living Streets London Older People's Strategy Group MIND National Children's Bureau 59

Accessibility Groups RNIB Sense Sixty Plus Stroke Association Sutton Centre for the Voluntary Sector The British Dyslexia Association

Local Interest Groups Ashling Lodge Beechwood Residents Association Bickley Park Residents Association Bickley Park School Biggin Hill & District Residents Association Biggin Hill Partnership Blenheim Primary School Bromley Beacon Academy Bromley Cyclists Bromley High School Browns School Chelsfield Primary School Chelfield Village Society Chenies Road Association Chislehurst Church of England Primary Chislehurst School for Girls Chislehurst Society Clannah Education Centre Community Options Ltd Coppers School Cotmandese Children and Family Centre Crofton Infant School Crofton Junior School Crofton Residents Association Darrick Wood Infant School Darrick Wood Junior School Darrick Wood School Darul Uloom London Farnborough Park Estate Ltd Farnborough Primary School Farringtons School First Stapleton Management Co. Ltd Residents Association Gray’s Farm Primary Academy Green Street Green Primary School Green Street Green Village Society Heatherwood Hillside Primary School Holy Innocents Catholic Primary School Homefiels Rise Residents Association Knoll Medical Practice Lauriston House Care Centre

60

Local Interest Groups Leesons Primary School London Borough of Bromley Residents Federation Lower Amherst Residents Association Manor Oak Primary School Marjorie McClure School Midfield Primary School Mountview & Perry Hall Residents’ Association Newstead Wood School Oregon Park Residents Association Orpington District Public Transport Users’ Association Park Avenue Residents Association Perry Hall Primary School Petts Wood & District Residents Association Place Farm & Sparrows Drive Estates Residents Association Poverest Medical Centre Poverest Primary School Riverside School Southborough Primary School St James’ Roman Catholic Primary School St Mary Cray Action Group St Olave’s and St Saviour’s Grammar School St Paul’s Cray Church of England Primary School St Peter and St Paul Catholic Primary School St Philomena’s Primary School St Mary Cray Primary Academy St Paul’s Cray Community Association St Paul’s Cray Residents Association The Charterhouse Surgery The Crescent Surgery The Highway & District Residents’ Association The Highway Primary School The Priory School TLC The Learning Centre Tower Pre-school Traveller Liaison Project Tubbenden Primary School Warren Road Primary School

Other Stakeholders BT Open Reach Canal River Trust EDF Energy Eltham Public Transport Group Licenced Taxi Drivers Association Living Streets London City Airport National Grid Northbank RMT

61

Other Stakeholders Royal Mail Royal Parks Sustrans Tesco Sidcup Thames Water Unions Together Unite the Union Virtual Norwood Forum

62

Appendix D – Questionnaire

63

64

65

66

Appendix E – Petition

67

68

Appendix F – All public comments about the scheme

R1 Comments Negative Do not reduce current frequency 48 Reduced frequency would increase passenger congestion on bus at peak/school 17 times. Frequency at peak times should remain at 15 mins 14 Crossing Sevenoaks Road will cause traffic on Tower Road and Repton Road 9 R1 is only bus to serve Repton Road and Charterhouse Road and reduction of 9 frequency is retrograde step Reduced frequency would increase waiting times 9 Reduced frequency would affect daily commute 8 Would negatively affect older, disabled or vulnerable customers 8 New route through Tower Road will delay route 7 Would increase journey time 7 Changes will impact residents on Windsor Drive area who use route to access 6 doctors/shop/transport hubs Reducing frequency will not improve poor reliability of route 6 Removing access from Sevenoaks Road will be detrimental to those travelling to 6 Repton Road, Charterhouse Road and Chelsfield Require reliable and frequent service to/from Orpington or Chelsfield stations for 6 commuters Chelsfield Station to Orpington is a popular route and requires at least 4 buses an 5 hour Will negatively affect school route 5 Reduced service for Green Street Green residents 4 Removes option of catching the bus as it returns down Station Road meaning only 4 option now would be to wait 20 mins Children will have to walk further to multiple schools in area if Sevenoaks road is 3 removed No bus shelter at stop so reduced frequency may mean waiting in poor weather 3 conditions for extended period of time R1 is only service to connect Orpington to Chelsfield station other than train 3 Windsor drive area is very hilly, regular bus service is lifeline to older residents 2 Would affect people travelling to Central London 2 Buses already pass stops without letting people due to passenger congestion 2 reducing frequency will make this worse Bus stops between Eton Road and Repton Road are too far apart 1 Crossing busy Sevenoaks Road would be dangerous for older pedestrians 1 Customers already pay for a poor service that the proposal will make worse 1 Frequency was only increased a couple of years ago why is it being reduced 1 Reduced frequency will increase car usage 1 Reduced frequency would increase work travel time and decrease income 1 Tower Road/Repton Road junction too dangerous 1 Will negatively affect businesses 1 Would increase journey cost 1 Would require taking a second bus 1 69

Positive Going via Tower Road reduces traffic at War memorial Roundabout and on Station 8 Road General comment 7 Reduces journey times 5 Support or have no issue with proposed route through Tower Road 5 More direct route to station 3 Support changes 3 Would improve service 2 Cuts out Sevenoaks Road which is already served by multiple buses 1 Proposed frequency is fine as much of the route is covered by other buses 1 Proposed frequency is okay if you guarantee buses will run on time 1 Suggestions Introduce new bus stop around junction between Tower Road, Sevenoaks Road and 10 Repton Road Install roundabout at junction of Tower Road and Sevenoaks Road 6 Sync the arrival of buses at Orpington and Chelsfield stations to the arrival of trains 6 Increase frequency 4 Do not reduce frequency 3 Install traffic lights at junction of Tower Road, Sevenoaks Road and Repton Road 3 Make Repton Road and/or Tower Road section Hail and Ride 2 Do not review route until normal service has resumed at London Bridge station 2 Avoid Station Road go via The Avenue to Sevenoaks Road add new stop outside 1 Sycamore Lodge Divert via Chipperfield Road instead of Leeson's Hill to have more direct route 1 through St Paul's Cray Go directly to Green Street Green from Tower Road and not via Chelsfield 1 Larger buses 1 Move bus station from Warren Road to Windsor Drive outside The Chelsfield Pub to 1 improve pedestrian safety Only reduce frequency in off-peak times 1 Reinstate 'Hail and Ride' section 1 Remove traffic island at junction of Tower Road and Sevenoaks 1 Current issues Tight turns for Repton Road, Sevenoaks Road & Tower Road difficult for buses and 14 will cause congestion Current route is unreliable; will proposal make the R1 run on time? 12 Overcrowded 3 Buses not completing full route 1 Other Misunderstanding: R1 bus route will still go to Orpington town centre 2 Out of context for this consultation 2 Misunderstanding: Route is not being altered around Glentrammon Road 1

70

R2 - Comments Negative Do not change route 14 No longer serves Petts Wood to Poverest Road 12 Would affect daily commute 12 Requires getting a second bus 11 Reduction of bus options from Petts Wood 10 R2 not serving Poverest Road 8 Increase in journey time 7 Increase in journey cost 6 School children would have to change bus/wait in the cold 6 Would negatively affect elderly/people with less mobility 6 Shortening route 5 Removes connection between Petts Wood/Orpington to Ravens Wood and Charles 5 Darwin Schools Reduction in frequency of buses at Petts Wood 4 Would no longer be able to use route 4 Would no longer be able to access the whole of the High Street 3 Will increase car usage 2 Route will leave Orpington High Street at different stop to other routes going via 2 Crofton Road Why is an infrequent and cost effective service under threat 2 Orpington High Street will be crowded during school times 1 Proposals do not go far enough in supporting residents of Biggin Hill 1 Puts customer's safety at risk 1 Section between Petts Wood and Orpington is busier than Orpington to Biggin Hill 1 Would negatively impact poorest residents of Biggin Hill 1 Positive No issue with route change 7 Positive if changes ensure improved service 7 Shortening route will improve reliability/fewer delays 6 Proposal makes sense with respect to changes to R3 2 Route is valuable to Biggin Hill valley 2 Buses being removed from Lower Road as it's too narrow for buses which damage 1 parked cars Few people travel between Orpington and Petts Wood 1 Offers better use of resources 1 Proposals are well organised 1 Current issues Route has always been unreliable 9 Morning buses are very often late or do not arrive 5 Currently used by learning disabled adults accessing Poverest Adult Ed. which is 4 growing in numbers Unreliable route due to mechanical breakdowns on buses 3 If morning buses do not arrive it forces customers to get 2 buses slowing travel and 2 costing more

71

Biggin Hill to Petts Wood full route under-used 1 Buses leave Orpington station just before trains arrive 1 Overcrowded during peak times 1 Weekday timetable is different to Saturday timetable by 5-10 mins 1 Suggestions Buses should run at either 15 or 20 min frequencies 6 Introduce Sunday/Bank Holiday service 6 If shortening the route TfL should increase the frequency of buses 3 Improve reliability of route/ensure buses are on time 4 Reduce length of R2 by finishing route at Forest Way roundabout and taking Cray 3 Avenue Terminate route at Perry Hall Road to serve the entire High Street 4 Sync buses with train times 2 Combine route with R6 to make longer route, provide access to High Street and 1 reduce costs Only shorten route to St Mary's Cray to retain link to Nugent Retail Park 1 Provide newer buses on this route 1 R2 should run from Biggin Hill via Locksbottom on to current R3 route 1 Run R2 during morning and afternoon periods 1 Run R2 with smaller buses due to parking issues with Biggin Hill Valley 1 Swap terminus with R8 due to parking issues at Biggin Hill Valley 1 Other Out of context of this consultation 2 Would make no difference to journey 1 Misunderstanding Petts Wood to Amherst Drive where R2 is cut will be replaced by R3 4

R3 - Comments Negative Maintain current route 19 Would increase journey time 17 Would affect daily commute 11 No longer serves Charterhouse Road 9 Proposed frequency means 1 less BPH for Orpington Hospital 9 Would affect elderly or disabled customers 9 Proposals remove access to Station Approach from Chelsfield village, would make 8 customers miss trains Route will run too frequently through Amherst residential areas especially on Sundays 8 Popular route for commuters between Orpington station and Chelsfield village 7 Would affect school route 6 Would require taking a second bus 5 Going via Amherst Drive will increase journey length 4 Route R3 would run through Amherst Drive much later at night than R2 4 Walk between Maxwell Pub stop and Orpington Station in adverse weather 4 Proposal may cause customers to miss early morning trains 3 Proposals will make route from Chelsfield village to Orpington Hospital longer 3 Walk between Maxwell Pub stop and Orpington Station is too long for elderly/disabled 3 72

passengers Would increase journey cost 3 Connection between Orpington Hospital and PRUH via Petts Wood would take over 2 in an hour Proposal removes direct access between Chelsfield/Charterhouse Road and Petts 2 Wood area Proposal will not address current delays 2 Removes option of catching the bus as it returns down Station Road meaning only 2 option now would be to wait 20 mins Serving Orpington Hospital will cause traffic delays to emergency service vehicles 2 Would increase noise pollution/vibrations 2 Bus stops on Lower Road have very low demand 1 Buses along Lower Road cause damage to parked cars 1 Concern over drivers not being able to rest at Orpington Hospital due to lack of bus 1 stop Lack of proper bus stop at Orpington Hospital 1 Loss of link between Charterhouse Road and PRUH 1 Lower Road is an old street that is not designed to carry buses along it 1 Lower Road is not wide enough for buses to pass down 1 Makes travelling with children harder 1 No access to Princess Royal Hospital 1 No link from Petts Wood to Poverest Road 1 Parked cars on Amherst Drive will slow buses 1 Proposal aims to get more customers from Walnuts centre than focus on daily 1 customers Proposal would force passengers to change buses outside Orpington station and 1 have to cross busy road Proposed route is still too long 1 Removal of Chelsfield stop as R1 route is not close enough to serve Chelsfield 1 Removes convenient link between Poverest Road and PRUH 1 Road rage occurs on Lower Road between car drivers and bus drivers 1 Route should not use Lower Road 1 Positive Increase in frequency 22 General comment 12 Amherst drive residents pleased over weekend and evening service 9 Links PRUH with Orpington Hospital 7 Benefits elderly and disabled customers 4 Serves Orpington Hospital 4 Support if service improves 3 Connects Amherst Drive/St Mary's Cray directly with Petts Wood and PRUH 3 Good reliability 2 Links Orpington station with Orpington Hospital 2 Maintain 'Hail and Ride' section which benefits children and elderly 2 Reduction in length 2 Connects Petts Wood to Orpington Hospital 1 Evening service will make it safer when travelling in the dark 1

73

Good drivers 1 Increase in frequency will reduce passenger crowding 1 Increased bus frequency through Amherst Drive 1 Introduction of evening service 1 Maintains connection between both sides of Petts Wood 1 More frequent service at weekends 1 No changes to part of route between PRHU and Petts Wood Road 1 Provides better transport links to those without a car 1 Provides wider connections for Petts Wood 1 Would be able to complete journey with one direct bus 1 Suggestions Sync R3 and 273 to be separated by 10 min intervals 7 Sync bus arrival times at stations to train times 4 Extend R3 to Green Street Green and terminate in Beechwood Ave/Cleave Ave 3 Increase frequency of 273 to cover reduction on Poverest Road 3 Extend R3 to PRUH from Orpington Hospital via Green Street Green and 2 Farnborough to make route circular The first bus of the day should leave earlier 1 Split route from Petts Wood to Chelsfield should go via Orpington Hospital on way 1 to/from Chelsfield Village Add permanent bus stop along Shepperton Road and Chesham Ave 1 Bus stops at Ascot Road/Sefton Road and Dorney Rise/Sherbourne Road 1 Ensure commuters are able to take buses at similar times to current timetable 1 Extension to Beechwood Ave/Cleave Ave would provide service to estate and reduce 1 congestion in Green Street Green terminus Frequency should be every 15 mins 1 Morning buses should start 5 mins later 1 Prevent bus from using Lower Road and move bus stops to Carlton Parade 1 R3 could use Cray Valley Road in order to connect to bus stop on Poverest Road 1 Replace current hail and ride section with permanent bus stops 1 Run buses every 20 minutes to Well Hill 1 Run R3 with smaller buses to improve delays caused by bad parking on Amherst 1 Drive Split route in two at Petts Wood to have Petts Wood to PRUH and Petts Wood to 1 Chelsfield Village Traffic lights on the Memorial roundabout instead of travelling via Tower Road 1 Use R4 to link both PRUH and Orpington Hospital rather than R3 1 Misunderstanding R7 will cover section to Charterhouse Road/Chelsfield village removed by R3 11 Proposed route will not be longer than current route 2 R3 will still travel down Station Approach 1 There is an existing bus stop at Orpington Hospital 1 Current Issues Service needs to be reliable 9 Route currently encounters delays especially during peak/school times 6 Current service in Chelsfield is poor 5 Assurances that bus will be reliable and punctual for Chelsfield village 3

74

Buses do not always travel all the way to Chelsfield village, new proposal will not 3 prevent this from occurring Service is poor 2 Drivers try to avoid picking up school children 1 Will the evening timetable remain the same 1 Other Out of context for this consultation 3

R7 - Comments Negative Proposals do not provide access to Station Approach, necessary for disabled access 22 and commuters Route has low demand 19 Going via Walnuts Centre before heading to Orpington Station will delay commuters 18 from Charterhouse Road & Chelsfield Village Do not use or add stand capacity at Chislehurst War Mem as would cause traffic and 14 impact nature of the area Will increase journey times 13 Bickley area to Chislehurst already has multiple transport options (269/162) 12 Would increase congestion 12 Would increase pollution 10 Increased frequency 8 Increased bus frequency is safety concern for Hawthorne Road and Blackbrook Lane 7 Introduction of Sunday service 6 Bus should not travel via Barfield Road, Golf Road, and Aquila Estate 5 Bus stop should be removed from Golf Road and residents should walk to Hawthorne 5 Road Do not build driver toilets on Royal Parade 5 From Orpington Station Sevenoaks Road residents will have to choose between 5 Crofton Road and the bus terminus Not enough space for buses at war memorial terminus 5 Route is a waste of money and increasing frequency and length will make it more so 8 Weight restriction of 7.5T over railway bridge on Blackbrook lane 5 Crossing Station Road to reach Orpington Station will be dangerous 4 Do not extend to Chislehurst War Memorial 4 Does not provide a connection between Chelsfield Village and Chelsfield Station 4 Will increase congestion on Blackbrook Lane 4 Buses on Hawthorne Road would force cars on to pavements damaging them 3 Extension of route will cause delays 3 Not using Station Approach will delay bus in further traffic 3 Pavements along Station Road are too narrow for buggies etc. 3 Would increase noise pollution 3 Alternative modes of transport available for residents around Aquila 2 Blackbrook Lane has a narrow road and pavements that will be dangerous at the 3 bridge and new bus stop Chislehurst to Orpington and Petts Wood are far quicker to reach by train 2 Congestion in Chislehurst could affect reliability of route 2 75

Limited number of shops at Chislehurst WM and few connections to other routes 2 R7 will simply pick up the existing R3 services 2 Route is too long 2 Access to bus stand at Chislehurst is across road junction 1 Bus creates pot holes on Golf Road 1 Bus stop/service on new section of Blackbrook Lane will cause traffic at roundabout 1 Difficult to connect to R2 service 1 Early morning route is unreliable and should always leave before 8am 1 Hawthorne Road surface is not adequate for buses and will degrade further 1 Orpington High Street has high levels of congestion 1 It will be quicker to walk from Walnuts Centre to Orpington Station than to take the 1 bus Lack of parking at Orpington station so bus should use Station Approach stop 1 Oldfield Road area already has 208/336/269 routes more buses are not necessary 1 TfL has disregard for Chislehurst common 1 Tight turns between Southborough - Hawthorne Road & Oldfield - Blackbrook are 1 safety issues Will not convince council to allow any alterations at Chislehurst War Memorial 1 Would block access to emergency vehicles on Hawthorne Road due to parked cars 1 Would endanger pedestrians on Hawthorne Road by forcing cars on to pavements to 1 let bus pass Would no longer serve whole High St from Chelsfield section 1 Positive Increased frequency to 30 mins 55 General comment 22 Extension of route to Chislehurst War Memorial 21 Introduction of Sunday service 19 Extension of route to Chelsfield 15 Benefits elderly and disabled customers 10 Enables access between Chislehurst and Orpington 10 Connects Chislehurst to Chislehurst & Bickley stations 6 Easier to remember timetable 6 Reduce car usage 6 Benefits Chislehurst residents 5 Would allow individual to use public transport 5 Would improve school route 5 Generally supports changes 4 Bus route on Blackbrook Lane 3 Provides access to commercial centres of Orpington and Petts Wood 3 Would shorten journey 3 Chislehurst easily reached 2 Goes via Walnuts Centre 2 Introduce R7 asap 2 More trade for local Chislehurst businesses 2 Offers an alternative to 269 and 182 2 Will allow customer to attend appointments at OH 2 Would allow greater transport flexibility 2 76

Would improve daily commute 2 Would reduce congestion and pollution 2 Connects Chelsfield to Crofton 1 Currently provides elderly and disabled customers with lifeline in Aquila estate area 1 Good drivers 1 Introduction of evening service 1 Longer route will create more revenue 1 More direct route than 273 between Petts Wood and Chislehurst 1 Route would make no difference to congestion 1 War memorial has room to accommodate an extra bus route 1 Will allow travel to hospital at convenient times 1 Will reduce congestion on Blackbrook Lane and Southborough Road 1 Will restore confidence in route 1 Would reduce passenger overcrowding 1 Suggestions Extend route to Green Lane Belmont Lane stop/Gordon Arms to serve Chislehurst 22 High Street and Sainsbury's R7-Suggestions Frequency should be every 15 or 20 mins 7 Direct link between Chelsfield and Chelsfield station via Warren Road and The Hwy 6 Route should use bus stop on Station Approach at Orpington 6 Use Bickley Park rather than Hawthorne/Blackbrook as it would cause less traffic 6 and has better infrastructure & connects Frequency should be every 30 mins at all times including Sundays and bank holidays 5 Go directly between Chislehurst and Petts Wood ignoring Hawthorne Road and 5 Oldfield Road Add another bus stop on Oldfield Road near Southwood Close 3 Extend route to Queen Mary's Hospital Sidcup 3 Link Chelsfield Village with Knockholt Station 3 Extend route to Chislehurst High St/Edgebury Primary School to provide alternative to 2 162 for school children Only extend to Bickley or Chislehurst station 2 Route should continue to serve Aquila Estate as it provides access to older 2 customers Route should go Via Knockholt Station and Pratt's Bottom to Green Street Green 2 Sync arrival of buses at Bickley Station with school leaving times (15.40 - 15.50) 2 Add another bus stop at Albyfield for buses coming from Bickley Station area 1 Add another bus stop at junction of Dale Wood Road and Crofton Lane 1 Add bus stop at Chelsfield Lakes Golf Club 1 Avoid Chislehurst and extend to Bromley South via Southlands Road 1 Avoid Walnuts loop during rush hour periods go straight to Orpington Station 1 Buses from Chislehurst going via Bromley Road use 3 different stops, make them 1 leave from the same stop Double run via the high street to pick up passengers on other routes who want the 1 hospital Ensure buses arrive at stops at the same time each hour 1 Frequency in evenings should be increased as it serves rural areas with no street 1 lighting Go via Chislehurst Station Approach to Yester Road, Willow Grove, High Street, 1 77

Albany Road, Green Ln and Park Road Go via Orpington Hospital before heading to Chelsfield 1 Install new stop at Blackbrook Ln/Hawthorne Road 1 New bus stop at Hewitt’s Farm 1 Only increase frequency for rush hour 1 Provide better links between Chislehurst High Street & Chislehurst Station & 1 Elmstead Woods Provide live arrival times of buses at stops 1 Provide residents from Aquila estate with Dial a Ride rather than increasing frequency 1 R7 morning bus times should remain the same while also increasing frequency 1 R7 timetable should fill the gaps between 162 & 269 rather than be run at the same 1 time Route should not go via Homefield Rise but go straight up Station Road 1 Service should run until 23.30pm 1 Spend money on upgrading buses rather than extending route/increasing frequency 1 Sync R7 with R4 at Orpington High Street 1 Use a different bus stop to the War Memorial one 1 Use the same bus stops as those used by R3 1 Other Out of context of this consultation 7 Opposes Chislehurst Society response 4 Supports Chislehurst Society response 2 Would like consultation on timetable 1 Current Issues Current congestion at Chislehurst War Memorial junction 9 Too many cars parked on Hawthorne Road due to station parking for bus to pass 8 easily. Concern over location of toilet stop for bus driver 4 Concerned that more regular buses on Hawthorne Road will increase congestion 4 Buses are old and heavily polluting 1 Current service excellent 1 Difficult for bus to turn at Sanderson Sq. due to parked cars 1 Drivers stop between bus stops 1 R7 operated from Bromley garage, not Metrobus, so could not use transferred assets 1 Too many empty buses 1

R11- Comments Negative Would negatively affect the disabled, elderly or parents with children 159 Do not remove Orpington Hospital stop from route 120 Would require taking a second bus 101 Steep hill between Sevenoaks Road and Orpington Hospital making it difficult for less 98 mobile customers Would lose direct link between Green Street Green and Orpington Hospital 81 Many people rely on R11 in order to attend Orpington Hospital 59 Do not remove Foots Cray Tesco stop from route 56 Would lose direct link between St Mary Cray/St Paul’s Cray and Tesco 42 78

Only adds a small amount of time to visit Orpington Hospital. 40 Many people rely on R11 to do their shopping at Tesco 34 Route is used by those who do not have alternative means of transport to reach 30 Orpington Hospital or Tesco Would increase journey time 30 Proposed R3 does not call at Green Street Green to replace R11 28 Would lose direct link between St Paul's Cray and Orpington Hospital 28 Would increase difficulty of journey 27 Would increase journey cost 27 Will compromise safety as customers have to cross or walk alongside roads at 20 Orpington Hospital Would affect daily commute 19 Changes will badly affect residents in St Pauls Cray who rely heavily on this bus 19 Changing to second bus would involve a wait, possibly in adverse weather conditions 18 Closure of Tesco stop would require walking further with heavy shopping bags 17 Would lose direct link between Sevenoaks Road with GP Surgeries and Orpington 17 Hospital Would be harder to keep appointments at OH 12 Would need to cross busy Cray Road to connect to second bus 10 Lack of parking at Orpington Hospital so bus is required 9 321 is not alternative as does not provide access to St Mary's Cray and does not run 8 very regularly Removes useful link to Tesco and Orpington Hospital 8 More buses not less should serve the hospital 7 Only benefits people living on the R3 route 6 Removing Orpington Hospital will increase car usage 6 Would lose direct link between Orpington and Tesco/Ruxley Corner Ind 6 Would make customer late for work 6 Changes to route lack justification and will isolate elderly communities 5 Tesco Sidcup stop required for work 5 Would force elderly customer to take taxi to reach hospital or Tesco 5 Wheelchair users find it hard to access public transport and this proposal would make 4 it even worse Would force customer to walk along busy/dangerous road to Tesco 4 Does not serve residents of Pratt's Bottom 3 More buses should serve Tesco 3 Removal of Tesco stop would only shorten route by couple of minutes 3 Removing Tesco stop would mean longer journey to Orpington for shopping 3 Would not like to walk down Edgington Way in the dark 3 Adding more buses won't help people going to Tesco 2 Lose connection between Queen Mary's and Orpington Hospital 2 More people need access to Hospital than before 2 only direct link from Orpington to Tesco Crittalls Corner 2 Proposal will prevent wheelchair user from accessing Orpington Hospital and Tesco 2 Sheltered housing in Green Street Green which requires access to Orpington 2 Hospital Street lighting not working along Edgington Way 2 321 route often terminates before reaching Tesco and R11 is a necessary alternative 1 79

Convenient for employees of hospital to have direct access to bus route 1 Cost increase would mean Tesco employees may no longer afford transport and 1 would have to stop working Increased frequency will cause congestion in Green Street Green 1 No direct access to PRUH from St Paul's 1 No shelter at Crittalls Corner (Stop FS) for customers 1 Only increase frequency for busiest time of day 1 Orpington Tesco closes at midnight while Foots Cray Tesco is 24hr 1 Proposal shortens journey times for TfL but not for customers travelling to Orpington 1 Hospital and Tesco Queen Mary's is not a replacement for Orpington Hospital 1 Tesco will only be served by one bus route which is not enough 1 TfL money making scheme 1 When R11 no longer stops at Orpington Hospital it will be following 358 from Green 1 Street Green Would affect Orpington Hospital patients travelling from Penge/Beckenham 1 Would increase drop off/pick up at Orpington Hospital causing congestion 1 Would prevent children from visiting Tesco for extracurricular schemes 1 Would seriously affect individuals with Alzheimer’s 1 Positive Increased frequency of route 10 Removal of Tesco stop will avoid congested section and speed up route 6 Faster journey times 5 General comment 3 Foots Cray Tesco stop rarely used due to new Tesco in Orpington High Street 2 Increased night and/or weekend frequency 2 Not many people access Orpington Hospital from Green Street Green 2 Removal of Tesco stop 2 Easy change for people switching from R11 to R3 1 Good drivers 1 Removal of Orpington Hospital 1 Route is being replaced at Orpington Hospital by R3 1 Very few commuters use route to access Foots Cray Tesco 1 Will be able to make more connections with trains 1 Will increase confidence in getting home late at night 1 Would reduce need to catch expensive taxis 1 Suggestions Continue serving Orpington Hospital bus stop 20 R11 should serve Orpington station due to increase in commuters from Green Street 5 Green and St Mary's Cray Extend B14 to Foots Cray Tesco to cover R11 reduction 4 R11 needs to be a double-decker 4 Divert either R5, R8, R10, 358 or B14 to continue serving Orpington Hospital and 4 provide direct links Extension to PRUH would link three hospitals; provide residents in Farnborough with 3 alt route, and Metrobus garage for driver change. Increase frequency but maintain route 2

80

Maintain current frequency and route 2 Reduce frequency but ensure it still serves Orpington Hospital 2 Sync R11 and 358 so they don't arrive at the same time on Sevenoaks Road 2 A countdown screen should be introduced at Tesco prior to revision of the route 1 Continue serving Tesco at certain points in the day (morning & evening) 1 Divert R11 down Chipperfield Road rather than Mickleham Road 1 Divert R11 route from Foots Cray High Street via Maidstone Road to Tesco returning 1 to route via Edgington Way Divert R11 via Crofton Lane through Bromley Common to Bromley 1 Every other bus should stop at Orpington Hospital 1 Extend route 321 to Orpington Station 1 Implement hail system at Orpington Hospital where passengers press button to 1 request next available bus Increase evening frequency 1 Rename R11 to R12 to remove confusion with R1 1 Reroute 321 to Queen Mary's Hospital to enable R11 to serve Tesco while reducing 1 bus congestion Current issues Buses not lit well enough 1 Buses overtake each other at Orpington 1 Often late to leave Green Street Green 1 Misunderstanding Customer would still be able to access Orpington Hospital from Orpington High Street 1 Other Out of context for this consultation 6 Will route still stop nearby Orpington Hospital 1

R1 & R3 Comments Negative Entering and exiting Tower Road from Station Road may increase congestion on 30 Station Road Route should not travel down Tower Road (maintain Sevenoaks Road section) 29 Congestion at peak school time and parked cars will cause more congestion and 25 delay buses on Tower Road Tower Road is a residential street and more buses will add to congestion 26 Turning right from Tower Road to Sevenoaks Road will cause problems/congestion 22 Bus stops on Sevenoaks Road no longer being served 20 Will create safety concerns on Tower Road 18 Bus will wait a long time to exit Tower Road on to Station Road 8 No longer provides access to GP surgeries on Sevenoaks Road, would make 8 patients have to walk further People use Tower Road as a rat run 8 Would affect the elderly, disabled or vulnerable 5 Buses on Tower Road will add to already noisy road 4 Cars park on both sides of Tower Road at weekends, buses will not be able to pass 4 Will endanger children at preschool at the top of Tower Road 4

81

No information on bus stops 3 Residents have good access to buses on Tower Road no need for more 3 Tubbenden bus stop will not cope with increase in passengers 3 Would have a bus every 5 mins down Tower Road which is too many 3 Would increase noise and pollution on Tower Road 3 Customers would have to walk further to catch a bus 2 GP Surgery on Sevenoaks Road has increased congestion on Tower Road, proposal 2 would add more Increased congestion on Tower Road would block resident's car in driveway causing 2 safety concern Poor pavements on Tower Road force people to walk in road which will be dangerous 2 with buses Reduction in services for residents between Sevenoaks Road and The Highway 2 Will not benefit residents on Tower Road 2 Buses on Tower Road will delay ambulances 1 Crossing busy Sevenoaks Road to catch R3 to Orpington Hospital from Repton Road 1 will be dangerous Going via Tower Road will delay customers from Green Street Green going to High 1 Street It's easier for buses to turn on to Station Road at the War Memorial than it is at Tower 1 Road Only leaving the 358 as access between Orpington station bus terminus and 1 Sevenoaks Road for the evening Residents can't access Orpington shopping centre 1 Turning from and into Station Road from Tower Road could be dangerous for cyclists 1 Would negatively affect house prices on Tower Road 1 Positive Using Tower Road will save time 14 Avoids war memorial roundabout 2 Buses on Tower Road will act as traffic calming for cars 1 Changes will ease congestion on the High Street 1 Suggestions Extend R3 to Green Street Green to replace link with Orpington Hospital 6 New bus stops on Tower Road 5 Install pedestrian crossing at Tower Road and Station Road junction for pedestrian 3 safety Prevent cars from dropping off passengers on Station Approach 3 Buses should not go to Orpington Station via congested Station Road 2 Install traffic lights at junction of Tower Road and Station Road 2 Paint double yellow lines at top of Tower Road to prevent congestion 2 Reliable service needed between Orpington Station and Charterhouse Road 2 Safety barriers in front of pre-school on Tower Road and at junction with Station Road 2 Close Hill View Road to traffic entering from Station Road to reduce congestion 1 Install pedestrian crossing on Station Road between Hillview and The Drive 1 Install pedestrian crossing on Tower Road near junction with Sevenoaks Road 1 Install speed bumps on Tower Road 1 Make buses wait in garages at Green Street Green instead of the roundabout 1 Move all pedestrian crossings at Orpington War Memorial further back to reduce 1 82

congestion Only run on Tower Road after 07:30 1 Remove bus stop at Tubbenden Lane to prevent traffic from buses using Tower Road 1 Station end of Tower Road should be no right hand turn 1 Use The Avenue instead of Station Road to avoid congestion from Tesco 1 Current Issues Cars entering and leaving Tesco car park Orpington cause traffic on Station Road 7 Introduction of Tesco and changes to the High Street have caused disruptions to the 3 buses Pedestrian crossing on Orpington High Street near roundabout creates delays, move 2 further down HS Poor use of bus stop opposite Orpington village hall causes blocks 1

R1 & R11 Comments Current Issues R1, R11, B14 arrive at stops at the same time as each other 6 Pratt's Bottom has very poor service with poor timetable which is not good for 2 environment Changeover of buses causes traffic at Green St Green, provide laybys 1 Suggestions Extend routes to PRUH 7 Extend R1 to Tesco to cover R11 removal 6 Extend route to Knockholt Station and Pratt's Bottom 4 Extension to PRUH would benefit older/disabled customers 2 Leave R1 frequency as is but go via the R11 route in the Crays, reduce R11 to 20 2 mins and run as proposed, divert B14 via R1 route rather than R11 route in Crays Add northbound bus stop near Oast House Way for access to Nugent Retail Park 1 Extension to Pratt's Bottom would help elderly and children 1 Extension to PRUH would require using less buses 1 Increase frequency of R1 and reduce frequency of R11 especially for Green Street 1 Green area Link Pratt's Bottom to Orpington to improve local economy and provide access 1

R2 & R3 - Comments Current Issues Routes used by commuters and are unreliable and not in sync with train times 1 Buses don't run on time due to Orpington High St traffic 4 Negative Removal of bus stop/route along Poverest Road forcing people, especially elderly, to walk further on steep road 19 Leaves Poverest Road/Cray Valley Road bus stop with only the 273 and no bus to Orpington centre 16 Increased frequency of R3 will not replace lost capacity from reduction of R2 10 Detouring around Amherst will increase journey length between Petts Wood & Orpington 9 Routes need to serve Poverest Road 8 Removal of R2 from Poverest Road will increase passenger congestion on R3 5 Need to be able to access schools/nurseries/surgery 3 83

Longer journey time to PRUH 1 Will smaller R3 route be able to cope with wheelchairs and buggies 1 General Poverest Road historically neglected in bus services 2 Suggestions Leave the routes just implement a new timetable 1

Other routes - Comments R3&R7-Negative: Special needs school in Chelsfield with children undertaking travel 6 training will be confused by new routes R1&R7-Negative: Orpington Station to Charterhouse Road would require catching R1 or 4 R7 which leave from different bus stops R2&R7-Suggestions: Introduce "Hail and Ride" section around Homefield Rise 2 roundabout R3&R7-Suggestions: Make sure early morning increase in frequencies fit around 1 existing times R3&R7-Suggestions: R3 to run Petts Wood to Chelsfield while R7 to run Chislehurst to 1 Walnuts Centre

General comments Out of scope for this consultation 39 Negative comment 19 Positive comment 10 Keep services as they are 3 Look to connect Orpington with Croydon 2 Scheme will increase congestion in Orpington High Street 2 Bus drivers need to let people sit down before driving off 1 Introduce one-hour free transfer tickets 1 Local government not meeting residents' needs 1 More information required 1 Previous narrowing of Orpington High Street means when 3 buses queue it creates congestion 1 Proposals will increase pressure on route R2 1 Will this scheme reduce congestion in the High Street? 1

Quality of this consultation Negative Did not receive leaflet in post 25 Not advertised widely enough 24 General comment 21 Only found out by chance 17 Local residents not informed about proposals 11 Did not provide enough information on bus stop locations 11 Lack of justification for route changes 9 Did not provide enough information 7 Only seen on social media 6 Disagree with introduction of proposals 5 No suggested date of implementation 5 84

Customer is blind/partially sighted and could not read leaflet 4 Did not provide enough information on timetables 4 Received two leaflets in the post which is extravagant 4 TfL staff at consultation did not know the routes 4 Proposals were not thoroughly researched/implications not considered 4 Not advertised on bus stops 4 Not widely reported in the local press 4 Consultation period not long enough 3 Did not receive email 3 Drop in session times not convenient for commuters 3 No information on buses on routes affected 3 Questions not specific 3 Received leaflet after date of consultation meetings 3 Scheme is not in the best interest of paying customers 3 Biggins Hill & St Paul's Cray residents received no information on proposal 3 Consultation advertising covering up bus stop timetables 2 Drop in sessions were not held in appropriate venues 2 Lack of information regarding current usage 2 Lack of senior members of TfL at consultation 2 Maps and proposed timetable not clear 2 Meeting during half term not convenient 2 Regular bus users not consulted on proposals 2 Residents should have been notified earlier about consultation meetings 2 Hard to find Consultation Hub/questionnaire online 2 Customer was not aware of public meetings 2 No information at Petts Wood or Orpington libraries or at Foots Cray Tesco 2 Bus stop advertising too small to read 1 Concern that proposals would be enforced before consultation was complete 1 Convoluted information 1 Customer is blind/partially sighted and could not fill out online form 1 Did not go door to door speaking to residents 1 Drop in session should've been held in St Paul's Cray library to consult elderly 1 residents who use bus to OH and Tesco Drop in sessions were only held in affluent areas 1 Full address of consultation location in Orpington not provided 1 Increase in number of buses passing through backstreets should have been made 1 clearer Label "Aquila Estate" on maps obscures road layout for R7 1 Leaflet looked like junk mail 1 More drop in sessions should have been organised 1 Need more room on response for open question 1 No costing information provided on new routes 1 No printed material seen 1 Not enough information on footfall 1 Not given enough time to organise petition against changes 1 Proposal should look at all bus routes in Orpington 1 R11 map is confusing for visually impaired/ colour blind individuals due to 321 1 85

marking Received poor telephone customer service when providing feedback 1 Sceptical as to whether TfL staff involved live in the area/use the buses 1 Staff not able to provide more information than in the leaflet 1 Unable to attend meetings 1 Website did not work properly, "next" button failed to work 1 Positive General comment 126 Good information 108 Clear 78 Good/clear maps 46 Good printed material 40 Easy to read / understand 30 Concise &/or Comprehensive 16 Well presented 11 Helpful staff 10 Website easy to use 10 Glad to receive leaflet 8 Happy for the opportunity to comment and make suggestions 8 Notices on bus stops 7 Easy online form 6 Good details of routes 6 Good questions 6 Drop in sessions were informative 5 Well-advertised 5 Consultation has been well run 4 Fair way to allow customers to express their views 3 Glad to be informed 3 Good social media presence 3 Provided good reasoning behind proposals 3 Received leaflet in good time before consultation end 3 Extended the consultation period to allow for demand 2 Well communicated to the public through multiple methods 2 Good if service improves 1 Professional 1 Received material for justification of route changes at meeting 1 Was able to request leaflet over phone and received good service 1 Concern Will comments be listened to 16 Consultation will not affect outcome 15 Did all residents affected receive a leaflet 7 Was enough done to inform those without internet access 6 May be confusing for elderly 5 Infrequent bus users may not be aware of the proposal 2 Cost of printed material 1

86

Suggestions Consultation should take a more holistic overview of Orpington transport 2 requirements Direct contact should have been made with residents living on routes 1 Drop in sessions on the weekend 1 Each house should receive a printed leaflet 1 Have open discussion before proposals 1 Implement scheme during school summer holidays 1 Information should have been given to Bromley District Talking News 1 Link to consultation page should be located on TfL home page 1 More statistics could have been provided 1 Provide direct link to questionnaire in booklet 1 Reduce print cost by not having solid banners 1 Supply consultation information in braille 1 Other Out of context for this consultation 16 Don't know 1

87